The historical meaning of the Reserve Bank’s Armistice Day coin

This year the Reserve Bank is releasing a coloured circulating fifty cent
coin to mark Armistice Day, the effective end of the First World War. This
follows a similar coin issued in 2015 to mark the Gallipoli campaign. Both
coins feature new-technology minting processes, and both were especially
commissioned to mark these events as the Reserve Bank of New Zealand’s
contribution to the government First World War centenary celebrations.2

This article outlines the historical meaning of the armistice and gives a
particular context for the Armistice Day coin. It also describes the special
design of the coin, which is one of only two coloured circulating coins issued
in New Zealand.

1 The historical importance of the Armistice

1.1 What was the Armistice?

The Armistice Day coin recognises the historical, social and cultural
importance of the armistice signed on 11 November 1918, just over
four years after the First World War began. During those years around
forty million people were killed or wounded, worldwide;3 and national
populations were drawn, one way or another, into the conflict.

This armistice was not the only such arrangement of the war: in mid-
December 1917, for example, the central powers and Russia signed an
armistice, leading to the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk that ended the eastern
war. In late 1918, as the Central Powers collapsed, other armistices
were signed, notably the Armistice Salonica of 29 September betweenBulgaria and the Allies; and the Armistice of Mudros of 30 October
between the Ottoman Empire and the Allies. However, it was the 11
November armistice signed by Germany that remained the most crucial
of these arrangements, for it brought to an end fighting on the Western
Front. This battle zone, stretching from the Alps in the south through to
the Channel coast, was the primary front of the First World War.

By late 1918 the Allied armies were advancing, but the German army
remained intact and able to fight, although US General John Pershing
thought another week might have broken them.4 The armistice was
pushed, instead, by the collapse of the German Government from late
October 1918, a crisis triggered by a Bolshevik revolt in the navy, but
fundamentally reflecting general unrest in the face of war shortages after
four years of Allied blockade. By early November there was open talk of
negotiations. The German armistice party finally signed at 5am on
11 November 1918, agreeing to end hostilities in six hours’ time.5

This armistice was not a peace treaty: that had to wait until mid-1919.
However, the First World War was of such scale and impact that, for all
practical purposes, the moment when fighting with Germany stopped
became the point of remembrance. Outside New Zealand and Australia,
11 November is memorial day for many former Allied powers.

1.2 How the First World War impacts us today

The First World War remains important to world and New Zealand
history for a variety of reasons. Many of the economic concepts and
systems that exist today can be traced to the way this war drove trendsand forced new developments. They include the move away from the
gold standard to fiat (legally based) currency, undertaken by Britain in
1914, largely as an expedient to enable the war to be paid for. However,
efforts to reinstate the gold system after 1918 were erratic and largely
unsuccessful, and today all major currencies, including New Zealand’s,
are fiat.6

Another economic outcome of the First World War was the rise of
Keynesianism, an approach developed by British economist John
Maynard Keynes in part to help address the socio-economic challenges
that Britain, in particular, faced after that war,7 with which New Zealand’s
own fortunes were entwined.8 These challenges were significant,9 not
least because the war had to be paid for; estimates of British war costs
range from 11 to 14.9 percent of total pre-war wealth.10 The economic
outcomes of the war also led the Bank of England to urge that the
Dominions within the British Commonwealth should set up their own
central banks. The Reserve Bank of New Zealand emerged from this
push in 1933–34.11

Lifestyles were also influenced by the war, not least through the way the
conflict threw focus on a safe, comfortable home life. It also transformed
home amenities. The ‘Second Industrial Revolution’ was well under
way by the early 20th century. The First World War accelerated the
process and added newly devised management techniques, which
were developed to enable more efficient production of war materiel. The
uptake of motor vehicles and domestic appliances in the 1920s, notably
in New Zealand, was facilitated by availability and falling prices on the
back of these industrial methods and management approaches.

Massed troops at a New Zealand Division thanksgiving service to mark the Armistice. Royal New
Zealand Returned and Services’ Association :New Zealand official negatives, World War 1914-
1918. Ref: 1/2-013804-G. Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington, New Zealand. /records/22620709

The requirement to maximise economic output and manage the way
populations were harnessed for the war effort also accelerated the
growth of government bureaucracy and power, leading to the dominating
state structures that characterised 20th century government across the
industrialised world.

There were also long-term international outcomes. The war accelerated
the decline of the ‘old’ European order.12 The new world of the 1920s
and 1930s was divided between western democracies and new
totalitarian powers, the latter variously fascist or communist. The
historical consensus is that the Second World War was part of the broad
cycle of socio-political change begun in 1918. Indeed, the historian Eric
Hobsbawm has argued that, because the Cold War reflected ongoing
state-level conflict between communism and capitalism–an opposition
that also emerged in 1914 –18–this broad social, economic and political
cycle on a world scale did not end until the early 1990s, when the Soviet
Union collapsed.13

The world today has been broadly shaped by these developments on
all these levels, most of which had their origins variously in the way the
First World War accelerated existing trends of that period, and in the
outcomes of that war. The armistice of 11 November 1918 is therefore
a symbolic anchor point, marking the moment when the fighting that
accelerated and intensified so many of these trends and developments
ended.

1.3 Why the Armistice carried emotional power

In a human sense armistice had huge meaning at the time, largely a
product of the fact that the war was of unprecedented scale and lethality.

This was new. Traditionally, warfare had been framed by economic constraints, transport technology, and disease. These acted as limiting factors, including during the globespanning European wars of the 18th and early 19th centuries.14

By the turn of the 20th century, industrial society was capable of
mobilising large numbers of people, of transporting them to battlefields
– often via ship and train – and of supplying them thanks to those same
transport systems and the industrialisation of food production. Vaccines
reduced the incidence of disease.15 Wars could be fought with a speed,
scale and endurance never previously seen.

Industrial technology also transformed warfare itself. By 1914 weapons
could produce far higher volumes of fire over vastly greater ranges than a
century earlier. Mines and barbed wire offered new obstacles to infantry.
As John Terraine pointed out, the outcome was that the industrial nations
could rapidly move men to this expanded battlefield in unprecedented
numbers; but could not move them on it. 16

The problem was that although Germany fought a mostly defensive war
in the west between early 1915 and early 1918, Allied commanders were
under political pressure to find ways through.17 Contrary to mythology,
tactics were carefully considered; but defences of trench, barbed wire,
mines and machine guns were almost impossible to defeat with infantry
and artillery alone. Nor was there any way of exploiting a break-through
other than with cavalry, who were vulnerable to the new weaponry.

The result was a lethal deadlock that lasted on the Western Front from
December 1914 until March-June 1918, when the Germans launched a
major offensive and broke the Allied lines. But they were unable to exploit
the advantage; and in August 1918 the Allied ‘hundred day’ offensive
began, using new tactics and technologies, notably tanks and closesupport
aircraft.18

These factors gave the war a deep and poignant human side, and it is
from this that the Armistice draws much of its emotional power today.

1.4 New Zealand’s scale of involvement in the First World War

The New Zealand experience was typical of that of all nations
involved, drawing in virtually the whole population, either through direct
participation, war-related work and activities at home, or through family
connections. Many New Zealand families, today, have close connections
with those who served in that war, particularly at Gallipoli and the
Western Front.

Curiously, the precise figures for direct New Zealand participation,
wounding and death remain unknown, in part because they have been
accounted for in multiple ways; but also because full figures were
not always collected. This has been a particular problem in terms of
discovering the Gallipoli participation rate.19

The main official document, the ‘Provision and Maintenance’ record,
indicates that some 92,860 officers and men had been despatched to the
war from its outbreak up until 12 November 1918. Another 9,578 were enlisted but still in New Zealand when war ended, totalling 102,438.20
However, that was subject to further revision, and the official Roll of
Honour published at the end of 1924 put the numbers at 100,444.21
More than 550 nurses and many other women also served.

Irrespective of variations in the statistics, the net total who went
overseas to the war, either to fight or in support of the effort, was about
nine percent of New Zealand’s entire wartime population. Of those
participants, more than 58,000 were killed or wounded. This rate of
roughly sixty percent was typical of that war: New Zealand, despite the
historical mythology, did not suffer more than other nations. The total
number of dead stands at around 16,500, but cannot be determined with
precision because some former soldiers died from the effects of gas
poisoning after December 1923, when the army stopped collecting those
statistics.

The outcome was that the war touched every family in the country, one
way or another.22 It was also an emotionally intense experience. Indeed,
the act of going to war was, itself, often traumatic for New Zealanders.
Although it was initially seen as a great adventure, that paled after a
while, particularly as casualty rates climbed. Jesse Stayte (1875–1918)
left New Zealand in July 1916 and felt “as though I had left all the world
behind me”.23 He was killed in action on 1 October 1918.24

That scale and style of experience gave the Armistice the same social
and emotional power here and among the New Zealand forces overseas that it had elsewhere at the time. The social place of the Armistice,
afterwards, was also shared with other nations to a significant extent,
although both in New Zealand and Australia had a more significant
cultural focus on 25 April, the day of the Gallipoli landings.

The women staffing the Lowry Hut canteen in Etaples, World War I. Royal New Zealand Returned
and Services’ Association :New Zealand official negatives, World War 1914-1918. Ref: 1/2-013435-
G. Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington, New Zealand. /records/23132505

2 How people experienced the armistice

For all the reasons outlined above – scale, industrial and economic
impact, human intensity and endurance – the armistice with Germany
had immense personal impact. However,
those at the front, particularly, were so numbed
by their experience that the fact that it was
over was hard to take in. Even those behind
the lines, in training camps or in hospitals,
had trouble emotionally accepting the fact that
fighting had ended.

‘We just wandered
aimlessly about
doing nothing’
– N. E. Hassall.

New Zealand’s main ground force, the New Zealand Division, had
already been rotated out of the front and was at Beauvois, ‘more or less
. . . wilting away on leave’,25 as New Zealand’s divisional commanding
officer, Major-General Andrew Russell (1868–1960) put it. But the men
were too stunned by what they had been through to react. Hugh Stewart
thought they were emotionless.26 Another soldier, N. E. Hassall, recalled
that ‘we just wandered aimlessly about doing nothing’.27

After a few days Russell became worried. ‘There has been little, if any,
exuberant display of enthusiasm over the armistice here,’ he remarked.
‘I am only exercised as to how to keep the men amused, interested and
occupied.’28 His worry was that Russia and Germany had both collapsed to Bolshevik revolution, and a meeting by former ‘Red Feds’ among his
own forces alarmed him.

Not every New Zealander had such a quiet end to the war. The Armistice
was not a peace treaty, and the British wanted to end the fighting in
the best tactical position, just in case
combat resumed. One New Zealander
caught in the rush was former
Wellingtonian Bernard Freyberg, then
a Brigadier-General commanding the
British 88 Brigade. He was ordered to
secure a bridge over the river Dendre
near Lessines, but was some 16 km
away when the order came, and had
just 90 minutes before the Armistice
took effect. He took horses and a
detachment of 7 Dragoon Guards into action at the gallop. They came
under sniper fire but, at what Freyberg always insisted was 10.59am,
secured the bridge.29 The Germans protested, but were ignored, and
Freyberg was awarded his second DSO.

‘There has been little, if
any, exuberant display
of enthusiasm over the
armistice here’
– Major-General Andrew Russell,
commanding the New Zealand Division.

Things were different away from the Western Front. In Egypt, which
remained a main base for New Zealand operations in Palestine, there
was celebration. “Great rejoicing in camp,” James Hislop (1897–1980)
wrote in his diary for 11 November. “All beer canteens raided”.30 That was
followed, a little later, by rioting in Cairo.

Harry Glass (1872–1959), was serving in New Zealand’s main base camp
on the Salisbury Plains in England. He was overjoyed. “The good news
has just been announced,” he wrote home at noon on 11 November, “All
drill has been cut out for the afternoon… a thanksgiving service is to take
place at 2 o’clock… They are taking things a bit quieter than I expected,
but they are all beastly glad.”31 Cyril Coxhead of the Canterbury Infantry
Regiment was in London, and wrote a short entry in his diary. “At 11 a.m.
‘Joy Bells’ ring out the Armistice. Great time on the Strand.”32

Alfred Olsson’s Armistice story

Alfred Olsson (1887–1968) who, in civilian life had been a grocer in
Woodville,35 was at Hornchurch military camp when the armistice came.
That evening he walked to nearby Romford to see how it looked “on the
first evening of peace”. 36

There was also a certain amount of mild excitement in London and
expectation of the important news coming through any minute.
However it was not until 11 o’clock this morning that the news
reached us in Camp and the first intimation of it was various noises in
the street outside such as the firing maroons [small powder rockets]
or something, which made a noise like guns fired, cheering and so
forth. At the mess-room just before dinner [lunch] we were officially
told by some of our officers that the armistice was signed and that
we were free for the day, and that free beer would be served at the
wet canteen tomorrow. …On coming down to Romford tonight the
most noticeable thing is the amount of light showing from the shops
and houses, which up till now have had to keep all lights concealed
because of possible air-raids.37

‘Peace blessed peace’ – the Armistice story of Fanny Speedy

New Zealand nurse Fanny Helena Speedy (1873–1942) was brought up
on a farm in southern Hawke’s Bay, Woodbank. She trained as a nurse
in Wellington and qualified in 1905.38 When war came she joined the New
Zealand Auxiliary Nursing Service, leaving New Zealand in April 1915
as one of the first 50 nurses to leave the country for war, and working at
the General Hospital in Alexandria, then on the hospital ships Assaye,
Gascon and Glengorn. In October 1916 she went to England, where she
nursed for the rest of the war.39 She recorded the moment of armistice in
her diary.

PEACE BLESSED PEACE. The bells rang at 11 a.m. and soon
we knew the Armistice had been signed. Yesterday we knew the
Kaiser and the Crown Prince had abdicated and fled to Holland,
the latter giving up all right to the Throne, and Germany forming a
republic. Insurrection everywhere and all the small states proclaiming
Republics and their Kings Fleeing [sic]. The streets are thronged
here and flags and bunting in all directions with shouting and singing.
Thanksgiving services in the churches. The whole thing seems too big
to realise and too sad to understand.40

3 The coin

The Armistice Day coin incorporates the official Returned and Services
Association poppy, surrounded by a remembrance wreath which features
the silver fern and koru. The poppy symbol has long been associated
both with the First World War and with war remembrance in general.
The flower grew on and around the First World War battlefields – for
New Zealanders, both at Gallipoli and on the Western Front – and was
generally adopted by the former Allied powers to symbolise that war
during the early 1920s.33

The three silver ferns represent both past, present and future; and the
three armed forces of New Zealand. The Korus pattern represents new
beginnings.34 The silver fern reflects New Zealand’s national identity. A
portrait of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II is on the obverse.

Two million fifty cent coins were minted, of which 1.6 million were
released into general circulation.

2018 Armistice Day coin

4 Conclusion

In 1918 the Armistice had profound meaning for the people involved in
the First World War, and it has remained a symbol of the ending of that
war – and the poppy a symbol of all war remembrance – since. The
Armistice itself remains a pivotal and significant moment in the social,
political and economic trends given shape and pace by the First World
War, which in turn gave shape to the broad patterns of the twentieth
century. This history, and particularly the personal stories of some of
those involved, gives both historical context and human meaning to the
circulating fifty cent coin issued to mark the centenary.

Crawford, John and Matthew Buck ‘Enumerating New Zealand Expeditionary Force Service on Gallipoli: Interim Report, March 2016.

Easton, Brian, ‘The Impact of the Great War on the New Zealand Economy’, Paper to the Asia Pacific Economic and Business History Conference: 13-15 February, 2014, https://www.eastonbh.ac.nz/2014/02/the-impact-of-the-great-war-on-the-new-zealand-economy/

Ferguson, Niall, The War of the World: History’s age of hatred, Penguin, London 2007.

Gambrill, R. F. (ed.), The Russell Family Saga, MS.

Griffiths, Paddy, Battle Tactics of the Western Front, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1994.

Hobsbawm, Eric, Age of Extremes, Abacus, London, 1995.

Keegan, John, A History of Warfare, Pimlico, London 1994.

McDonald, Andrew, First Day of the Somme, HarperCollins, Auckland 2016.

Romer, Christina D., ‘Existing Estimates, New Estimates, and New Interpretations of World War I and its Aftermath’, Journal of Monetary Economics, Vol. 22 , No. 1, July 1988.

7 For a New Zealand case study, see Brian Easton ‘The Impact of the Great War on the New Zealand
Economy’, Paper to the Asia Pacific Economic and Business History Conference: 13-15 February,
2014, https://www.eastonbh.ac.nz/2014/02/the-impact-of-the-great-war-on-the-new-zealand-economy/,
accessed 25 July 2018. Recent interpretation of the US experience paints a different picture in which
war production substituted for domestic production, see Christina D. Romer, ‘Existing Estimates, New
Estimates, and New Interpretations of World War I and its Aftermath’, Journal of Monetary Economics,
Vol. 22 , No. 1, July 1988, pp. 91-115, http://www.nber.org/papers/w2187, accessed 25 July 2018.

8 For discussion see Matthew Wright ‘Mordacious years - socio-economic aspects and outcomes of
New Zealand’s experience in the Great Depression’, Reserve Bank of New Zealand Bulletin, Vol.72
(3), September 2009, https://www.rbnz.govt.nz/research-and-publications/reserve-bank-bulletin/2009/
rbb2009-72-03-02, accessed 25 July 2018.

9 For summary of the economic side, see Stephen Broadberry and Mark Harrison, ‘The economics
of World War I: a comparative quantitative analysis’, 2 August 2005, https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/
economics/staff/mharrison/papers/ww1toronto2.pdf, accessed 25 July 2018.

10 Stephen Broadberry and Peter Howlett, ‘The United Kingdom during World War I: business as usual?’,
18 June 2003, p. 32, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.200.8263&rep=rep1&typ
e=pdf, accessed 25 July 2018.

17 German offensives included that at Verdun, but until early 1918, when the eastern war ended, were not
of the scale of their operations in the east. See, e.g. Paddy Griffiths, Battle Tactics of the Western Front,
Yale, University Press, New Haven, 1994, pp. 96-98.

18 Matthew Wright, The New Zealand Experience at Gallipoli and the Western Front, Oratia Books, 2017,
pp. 268-282.